Lawyer Velislav Velichkov before FCTI: The Sarafov case was resolved back in June last year (VIDEO)

I think that the Sarafov case was resolved back on July 21 of last year. At that time, legal amendments were adopted to the Judiciary Act, which limited the right of a person - a magistrate - to hold the position of Chief Prosecutor, Chairman of the Supreme Judicial Council or the Supreme Administrative Court for more than 6 months, if he does not have a regular mandate, but performs the functions of an administrative manager. This law, even during its discussions in parliament, was defined by people who disagreed with its text as the “Sarafov law”. That is, a law is being made so that Sarafov cannot remain in office for five years, for example, without ever having received a regular mandate. This is clearly evident from the transcripts of the National Assembly. This was announced to Lili Marinkova in the studio “FACTS“ and the program “Conversation“ by lawyer Velislav Velichkov from “Justice for Everyone“.

“After that, the Supreme Court of Cassation, the criminal panel, which considers the requests of the Prosecutor General for the resumption of criminal proceedings, issued an opinion that after July 21, 2025, when the first 6 months have expired, Acting Prosecutor General Sarafov cannot hold this position. All panels that considered such requests declared them inadmissible, and most appellate panels from Sofia, Plovdiv and Varna - with few exceptions - also declared them inadmissible. That is, the situation is absolutely clear and categorical. With the exception, of course, of the Prosecutorial College of the Supreme Judicial Council, which claims that Mr. Sarafov, because he held the position when the law was adopted, is in a pre-existing position and this restriction does not apply to him“, the guest added.

“Their logic leads to the fact that if a new composition of the Supreme Judicial Council cannot be elected to elect a regular Prosecutor General, this means that Mr. Sarafov can be a perpetual Prosecutor General without having a regular mandate. This is a gross violation of one of the basic principles of democracy - the rule of law and mandate. This is also stated by the Constitutional Court in its decision. Now the Constitutional Court is answering the questions whether this text, which limits the possibility of a magistrate to hold the position, performing the functions of an administrative head, is in contradiction with the Constitution. And the Constitutional Court says clearly and categorically that it is not in contradiction. This means that the law must be applied, not interpreted. The Prosecutor's Chamber of the Supreme Judicial Council has no right to interpret the law. The very fact that the Judicial Chamber applied it in a similar case shows how to act“, said lawyer Velichkov.

See more of the conversation in the VIDEO.